MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: mug644 on March 13, 2018, 08:26:09 AM
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22738396/larry-scott-pac-12-conference-cries-foul-usc-trojans-omission-ncaa-tournament (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22738396/larry-scott-pac-12-conference-cries-foul-usc-trojans-omission-ncaa-tournament)
The article mentions that USC's "decision to accept an invitation to the consolation tournament was made by the USC administration and allowed for the possibility that some of the team's top players -- specifically potential NBA draft pick Chimezie Metu -- could elect not to play."
Wow, your team is playing but you, the star, choose not to play?! I guess it's a bit like football players who choose to not play in a bowl game.
I don't like it at all; it reeks to me of bad character and selfishness. I'm not willing to accept the potential for injury excuse.
-
It's exactly like college football in that it's completely appropriate for the players to decide what they will and will not risk their bodies and livelihoods for.
If Rowsey was 6'2 and had an NBA future, I don't think pursuing an NIT championship is worth the risk.
-
Let them be selfish, It's their future career prospects. Doesn't bother me in football, won't bother me for basketball.
I try to think of it in regards to Marquette. If Rowsey decided he didn't want to play in the NIT for his future pro prospects I wouldn't be mad. Now if it was the NCAA tournament I would be a little disappointed, but I doubt any players would take that route if they were in the big dance.
Edit: GB you beat me to it by 10 seconds.
-
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22738396/larry-scott-pac-12-conference-cries-foul-usc-trojans-omission-ncaa-tournament (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22738396/larry-scott-pac-12-conference-cries-foul-usc-trojans-omission-ncaa-tournament)
The article mentions that USC's "decision to accept an invitation to the consolation tournament was made by the USC administration and allowed for the possibility that some of the team's top players -- specifically potential NBA draft pick Chimezie Metu -- could elect not to play."
Wow, your team is playing but you, the star, choose not to play?! I guess it's a bit like football players who choose to not play in a bowl game.
I don't like it at all; it reeks to me of bad character and selfishness. I'm not willing to accept the potential for injury excuse.
Yeah, I don't like it for football, but I get it due to the nature of the sport. In basketball, they play constantly and the odds of getting hurt in a game are not significantly greater than in a pickup game or practice.
-
I see, we don't like it when the cheap labor decides to protect their long term revenue prospects contrary to our need to be entertained.
(https://78.media.tumblr.com/0ded738204c302e0bc72e105823e2adc/tumblr_o5gra39OqF1tq4of6o1_400.gif)
-
I see, we don't like it when the cheap labor decides to protect their long term revenue prospects contrary to our need to be entertained.
I don't think I'm seeing it that way. I'm looking at it from a teammate perspective. A group has gone this far working together, and suddenly someone is selfish and opts to not play. As a teammate, I would be pissed off. As a scout, I would be unimpressed. As a parent, I would get my kid some insurance.
-
Cost-benefit to the player. Going full Steph or Kemba and lighting up the NCAA Tournament is great for the player's prospects. No one ever got the national spotlight from their NIT run.
Same deal with bowl games - great for players to build their brand in CFP games, far less benefit for a player on a 6-6 team from playing in the Budget Motels Apple Orchard Bowl.
-
I have no problem at all for players to make decision in their own best interest. The NIT is about making money for the NCAA (albeit a lot less than the NCAA). The players should to take control of their careers early on and make decision accordingly.
-
I see, we don't like it when the cheap labor decides to protect their long term revenue prospects contrary to our need to be entertained.
(https://78.media.tumblr.com/0ded738204c302e0bc72e105823e2adc/tumblr_o5gra39OqF1tq4of6o1_400.gif)
People's desire to be entertained is why they have a scholarship in the first place. It is literally why they are able to be there. They aren't cheap labor. Their compensation package is worth conservatively $80K/year, which is way more than a minor leaguer would get (which is what they are). There is basically no additional risk to playing in the NIT. If it is OK to skip the NIT why isn't it OK to skip the NCAA tournament?
-
Isn't that the equivalent of quitting the team? Can't they lose part of their scholarship?
-
I don't think I'm seeing it that way. I'm looking at it from a teammate perspective. A group has gone this far working together, and suddenly someone is selfish and opts to not play. As a teammate, I would be pissed off. As a scout, I would be unimpressed. As a parent, I would get my kid some insurance.
NBA scouts know better. They know why the player is skipping out.
-
I think the far more interesting part of the article is the reasoning for keeping USC out. Remember they finished 2nd in the Pac12, this means that finishing 3rd in the Beast would not have guaranteed a bid. They mention lack of high quality wins, which is something that we share with them. They also mention record vs tournament teams. USC only won two games against tournament teams, both mid majors, and went 0-5 against Pac12 teams that made it. PC, CU, and SH weren't super high seeds, but we still got 5 wins out of a possible six against them. I realize that the horse is now dead, but it seems like we should have gotten a bid before them considering the reasoning for keeping Southern Cal out.
-
Isn't that the equivalent of quitting the team? Can't they lose part of their scholarship?
Yes. They won’t though. No coach would do it and the press would crucify them.
-
People's desire to be entertained is why they have a scholarship in the first place. It is literally why they are able to be there. They aren't cheap labor. Their compensation package is worth conservatively $80K/year, which is way more than a minor leaguer would get (which is what they are). There is basically no additional risk to playing in the NIT. If it is OK to skip the NIT why isn't it OK to skip the NCAA tournament?
You are playing for something in the NCAA, there is nothing to play for in the NIT except getting more experience/playing time.
-
Call me skeptical, but I don't think this has anything to do with players wanting to protect their long-term interests or any of that garbage. They're clearly making a statement.
You are playing for something in the NCAA, there is nothing to play for in the NIT except getting more experience/playing time.
I get from a fan perspective that the NIT offers very little, but what is it that players are playing for in the NCAA that they aren't in the NIT?
-
I think the far more interesting part of the article is the reasoning for keeping USC out. Remember they finished 2nd in the Pac12, this means that finishing 3rd in the Beast would not have guaranteed a bid. They mention lack of high quality wins, which is something that we share with them. They also mention record vs tournament teams. USC only won two games against tournament teams, both mid majors, and went 0-5 against Pac12 teams that made it. PC, CU, and SH weren't super high seeds, but we still got 5 wins out of a possible six against them. I realize that the horse is now dead, but it seems like we should have gotten a bid before them considering the reasoning for keeping Southern Cal out.
Not all power 6 conferences are created equally. You know as well as I do that finishing 3rd in the Big East was much harder than finishing 2nd in the Pac 12 this year. And for us to have finished 3rd we would have needed at least one more win, would have given us another Q1/Q2 win or removed the ugly Q3 loss. Either of those things would have improved our chances of getting a bid.
-
People's desire to be entertained is why they have a scholarship in the first place. It is literally why they are able to be there. They aren't cheap labor. Their compensation package is worth conservatively $80K/year, which is way more than a minor leaguer would get (which is what they are). There is basically no additional risk to playing in the NIT. If it is OK to skip the NIT why isn't it OK to skip the NCAA tournament?
The problem is the "compensation package" isn't really compensation for someone who's there to play ball and leave. That's why calling it "compensation" is misleading. Schools benefit enormously from those players and perhaps the players do too, but not because of the schollies. To the contrary, the value of free tuition is pretty much worthless to a player going early to the League.
-
Not all power 6 conferences are created equally. You know as well as I do that finishing 3rd in the Big East was much harder than finishing 2nd in the Pac 12 this year. And for us to have finished 3rd we would have needed at least one more win, would have given us another Q1/Q2 win or removed the ugly Q3 loss. Either of those things would have improved our chances of getting a bid.
Improved? Yes. Guaranteed? No.
Leaving Southern Cal out just proves that the committee was telling the truth when they said that they don't look at conference standings. Some people here seemed to think that just because we're one game out of third means we were one game away from the tourney. Based on our NIT seeding, I still maintain that it would have either taken one big win (X, Nova), or two other wins (St. Johns, DePaul, Georgia).
-
Selfish move by any player who does it...but the team is probably better off.
If the kid is focusing on his future prospects and sees more risk than benefit in this game, his head isn't going to be fully in it anyway. And since situations like this would only occur with seniors (or players who are going to leave early), it opens up more playing time for guys who will likely be back with the team next season. Early preseason game for '18-'19.
-
The 2018 NIT is basically the very early 2018-19 preseason.
If you're an underclassman, go all in!
If you're a senior who's going to be playing in Poland or getting a desk job next year, play your heart out!
If you're going to the NBA, what's the point?
-
The 2018 NIT is basically the very early 2018-19 preseason.
If you're an underclassman, go all in!
If you're a senior who's going to be playing in Poland or getting a desk job next year, play your heart out!
If you're going to the NBA, what's the point?
The point is you are a teammate, and your team is still playing and trying to win a championship. To walk away from your team--even if for explicable reasons--is selfish and a disservice to your team and teammates.
-
Honestly, I wouldn’t be upset if Sam or Greg sat out due to their injuries. I’m glad I get to watch them play more, but wouldn’t be mad if they made a decision to be more ready for next year.
-
If I am a legit NBA prospect, I am not playing in the NIT either.
By the way, this thread title is wildly misleading. Makes it seem like Marquette is doing this.
-
You are playing for something in the NCAA, there is nothing to play for in the NIT except getting more experience/playing time.
You're playing for a championship, though a much lesser championship. You're playing for your teammates, for your school, for yourself. Another chance to impress scouts in game action, same as any regular season game you played in. What are you playing for when you're playing a cupcake you are going to beat by 30 whether you play or not? Once your team's resume says you're not making the NCAA tournament, why are you playing before the conference tournament starts? You're not playing for anything. You play because that's what you agreed to do when you went to the school.
-
You're playing for a championship, though a much lesser championship. You're playing for your teammates, for your school, for yourself. Another chance to impress scouts in game action, same as any regular season game you played in. What are you playing for when you're playing a cupcake you are going to beat by 30 whether you play or not? Once your team's resume says you're not making the NCAA tournament, why are you playing before the conference tournament starts? You're not playing for anything. You play because that's what you agreed to do when you went to the school.
Some of the NIT teams may as well be cupcakes.
-
If I am a legit NBA prospect, I am not playing in the NIT either.
By the way, this thread title is wildly misleading. Makes it seem like Marquette is doing this.
Should they not participate in Summer league pickup games, too?
-
The problem is the "compensation package" isn't really compensation for someone who's there to play ball and leave. That's why calling it "compensation" is misleading. Schools benefit enormously from those players and perhaps the players do too, but not because of the schollies. To the contrary, the value of free tuition is pretty much worthless to a player going early to the League.
The "compensation" is only "not compensation" if you choose not to take advantage of it. If you don't want an education because you're going to the NBA go play in Europe for a few Euros to get ready. If you go to college, honor your commitment, especially when there is no real risk to it. Like I said earlier, I understand it more with football because of the inherent dangers of the sport coupled with the relatively short career even for great players.
Basically, the NBA should take high schools kids and let them play in the G League until they're ready and those that choose college should honor their commitment.
-
The point is you are a teammate, and your team is still playing and trying to win a championship. To walk away from your team--even if for explicable reasons--is selfish and a disservice to your team and teammates.
I think most teammates would support their decision.
-
People's desire to be entertained is why they have a scholarship in the first place. It is literally why they are able to be there. They aren't cheap labor. Their compensation package is worth conservatively $80K/year, which is way more than a minor leaguer would get (which is what they are). There is basically no additional risk to playing in the NIT. If it is OK to skip the NIT why isn't it OK to skip the NCAA tournament?
Of course there is additional risk to playing in the NIT, for sure it's not any more risky than normal, but career ending or even season ending(which could cost you the next season) injuries are possible.
If they want to skip the NCAA tournament I wouldn't have an issue with that either. Since both tournaments are not universal (not all teams participate) I don't consider it as part of the standard compensation package that comes with a scholarship. A player, unless a sure fire NBA top 15 pick would be silly to skip the NCAA as there are all sorts of opportunities to really raise their draft profile with a deep run in the NCAA.
And yes they are cheap labor relative to the revenue they generate for the big time programs (for the not big time programs this isn't true of course).
-
Should they not participate in Summer league pickup games, too?
Different things, Summer League games can increase your visibility with the NBA....NIT most likely will not because everyone is watching/scouting the NCAA tournament.
-
If I am a legit NBA prospect, I am not playing in the NIT either.
By the way, this thread title is wildly misleading. Makes it seem like Marquette is doing this.
That's called clickbait. It works. And I immediately linked the article and made reference to USC.
-
Thought I saw that Louisville took a vote whether to participate in the NIT. I agree with the notion that underclassmen coming back get extra reps and game situations, seniors not going to the league get extra games, but anyone knowing they will be in the league a year from now.....meh.
-
I think most teammates would support their decision.
Perhaps publicly, but perhaps not privately.
-
The problem is the "compensation package" isn't really compensation for someone who's there to play ball and leave. That's why calling it "compensation" is misleading. Schools benefit enormously from those players and perhaps the players do too, but not because of the schollies. To the contrary, the value of free tuition is pretty much worthless to a player going early to the League.
Everyone makes tons of money off some kids with scholarships -- nevermind that the school will send them across the country to play a 9:00 Wednesday game on TV (so everyone else can make money) on the other side of the country and then fly them back in the early AM, then they are expected to be in class the next morning.
Every major D-1 sport is about making money, not educating the athletes.
-
Should they not participate in Summer league pickup games, too?
The Summer League is tied in the NBA, the NIT is not. Blow out your knee playing in the NIT and that just potentially cost you million of dollars, and maybe even your NBA career. Not worth it.
That's called clickbait. It works. And I immediately linked the article and made reference to USC.
Yah, it is misleading.
-
Any player with asperations to play at the next level can skip the NIT if they want. Your not building your profile by droppng 45 points on Harvard or UNC Asheville. No one will remember the block, the drive, and the buzzer beater in a single play that would live on forever had it been in the NCAA tournament.
Look guys I know we are all super excited about the NIT now that we are in it, but lets not kid ourselves. It's a tournament for the sake of a post season play for high major teams. It can be skipped if the players want.
PS: Are we really giving grief to a single player when we as a university skipped the nit once?
-
Different things, Summer League games can increase your visibility with the NBA....NIT most likely will not because everyone is watching/scouting the NCAA tournament.
Not only that, but some coaches experiment in the NIT, e.g., starting their freshmen, etc. It's effectively like preseason NFL football. Simply put, I'd wager that the NIT has close to zero scouting value.
-
As a scout, I would be unimpressed.
This also was cited by several Scoopers in regards to the football guys. And then a bunch of them were drafted high in the first round.
GMs/coaches draft for potential. If a guy is a stud, he is a stud. Sitting out didn't hurt Fournette's "draftability" one iota. Meanwhile, getting hurt in a meaningless bowl game cost Michigan's Jake Butt millions of dollars.
The best argument against what these USC guys are doing, IMHO, is that college kids play pickup ball constantly, and it's hard to believe these USC guys won't be doing the same. As opposed to football - I mean, I doubt Fournette was playing pickup football in the yard.
Given the choice, I'd feel better about my chances of staying healthy playing in a controlled environment with trainers present - like the NIT - vs pickup ball with my buddies.
But it's not my choice, it's the kid's choice. I support it fully.
-
Should they not participate in Summer league pickup games, too?
Are you talking about summer leagues like The Drew and Rucker, or the NBA Summer League? Two very different things.
But either way, participating in something like The Drew is voluntary, so it's a bad analogy.
-
Of course there is additional risk to playing in the NIT, for sure it's not any more risky than normal, but career ending or even season ending(which could cost you the next season) injuries are possible.
If they weren't playing in the NIT they'd be working out or doing drills or practicing or playing in scrimmages, where the risk of injury is the same. That's why I don't think it is particularly risky, unlike football, where they are not getting hit several dozen times by 300 pound behemoths if they're not playing.
-
If they weren't playing in the NIT they'd be working out or doing drills or practicing or playing in scrimmages, where the risk of injury is the same.
Do we know this to be true?
Not say it is or isn't, but I wonder whether this made several times here is accurate.
-
This also was cited by several Scoopers in regards to the football guys. And then a bunch of them were drafted high in the first round.
GMs/coaches draft for potential. If a guy is a stud, he is a stud. Sitting out didn't hurt Fournette's "draftability" one iota. Meanwhile, getting hurt in a meaningless bowl game cost Michigan's Jake Butt millions of dollars.
The best argument against what these USC guys are doing, IMHO, is that college kids play pickup ball constantly, and it's hard to believe these USC guys won't be doing the same. As opposed to football - I mean, I doubt Fournette was playing pickup football in the yard.
Given the choice, I'd feel better about my chances of staying healthy playing in a controlled environment with trainers present - like the NIT - vs pickup ball with my buddies.
But it's not my choice, it's the kid's choice. I support it fully.
As a scout, I'd be unimpressed, not because I wouldn't have one more chance to see the guy play, but because it tells me something about his character. That he's willing to put himself before his team.
I understand the logic. I disagree with the choice.
Others see it differently, and so it goes.
-
As a scout, I'd be unimpressed, not because I wouldn't have one more chance to see the guy play, but because it tells me something about his character. That he's willing to put himself before his team.
As the scout of a professional team, you would be unimpressed by a player's motivation to look out for himself professionally?
-
The "compensation" is only "not compensation" if you choose not to take advantage of it. If you don't want an education because you're going to the NBA go play in Europe for a few Euros to get ready. If you go to college, honor your commitment, especially when there is no real risk to it. Like I said earlier, I understand it more with football because of the inherent dangers of the sport coupled with the relatively short career even for great players.
Basically, the NBA should take high schools kids and let them play in the G League until they're ready and those that choose college should honor their commitment.
Others have said it but it's an important point: the logic above relies on the premise that a school's intent in offering a scholarship to a top player is to provide an education. But of course it isn't. Schools offer scholarships because that player can play basketball really, really well. So well, in fact, that people will come and pay money to see the team play, and networks will pay money to watch them on TV, etc. The program will (ideally) succeed because of that player. And the player gets exposure as a result. It's a business arrangement on both sides. Perhaps this USC kid should honor a commitment to his teammates - a decision that we, tapping away on our phones in random cities, have no real input on.
But commitment to the school has nothing to do with it.
-
As the scout of a professional team, you would be unimpressed by a player's motivation to look out for himself professionally?
Different ways to look at the same thing. Neither perspective is any more correct than the other.
-
Different ways to look at the same thing. Neither perspective is any more correct than the other.
Respectfully disagree.
-
Different ways to look at the same thing. Neither perspective is any more correct than the other.
That's not really true. On one side you have hundreds of athletes making these kinds of professionally self-interested choices all the time, seemingly without consequence. On the other side...when have you seen a franchise hold it against a player for watching out for his professional well-being?
-
It's exactly like college football in that it's completely appropriate for the players to decide what they will and will not risk their bodies and livelihoods for.
If Rowsey was 6'2 and had an NBA future, I don't think pursuing an NIT championship is worth the risk.
I think not playing is a big risk to the players NBA potential and draft standing. The teams are looking for every reason to either draft or not draft a player. In many there is an innate desire to win and it doesn't matter at what. In a league that only the best of the best of the best play, any reason that causes pause will negatively impact a player. Does he have the desire? Is he only going to show for big games? What if he doesn't get his way? Will he sit out because he wants more? Players need to prove they are elite in all aspects and not playing brings questions. We will see how far (if at all his stock drops) if he doesn't play.
-
Respectfully disagree.
Fair enough.
That's not really true. On one side you have hundreds of athletes making these kinds of professionally self-interested choices all the time, seemingly without consequence. On the other side...when have you seen a franchise hold it against a player for watching out for his professional well-being?
Respectfully disagree.
-
I think not playing is a big risk to the players NBA potential and draft standing. The teams are looking for every reason to either draft or not draft a player. In many there is an innate desire to win and it doesn't matter at what. In a league that only the best of the best of the best play, any reason that causes pause will negatively impact a player. Does he have the desire? Is he only going to show for big games? What if he doesn't get his way? Will he sit out because he wants more? Players need to prove they are elite in all aspects and not playing brings questions. We will see how far (if at all his stock drops) if he doesn't play.
As MU82 pointed out earlier, the exact same things were said of Leonard Fournette and Christian McCaffery when they skipped out on bowl games. It didn't hurt them at all.
-
As a scout, I'd be unimpressed, not because I wouldn't have one more chance to see the guy play, but because it tells me something about his character. That he's willing to put himself before his team.
Scouts don't care about that. If the kid can play, the kid can play.
-
Scouts don't care about that. If the kid can play, the kid can play.
Yep. In no way is that a character flaw.
-
Yep. In no way is that a character flaw.
Well, in a very real way, they are being selfish....?
-
Scouts don't care about that. If the kid can play, the kid can play.
Accepted. I've never been a scout, but have been a teammate many, many times. My opinion is obviously based on my own experience and how I would approach the situation. I would be very turned off if a teammate walked out on the team like that.
But, as stated above, different perspectives can be equally valid.
-
Agree that its a flaw but i think when NBA gms are evaluating talented young men not all character flaws are treated the same. I think we can all think of a ton of professional prospects that had made much poorer choices that deemed acceptable enough to take a chance ...
-
Others have said it but it's an important point: the logic above relies on the premise that a school's intent in offering a scholarship to a top player is to provide an education. But of course it isn't. Schools offer scholarships because that player can play basketball really, really well. So well, in fact, that people will come and pay money to see the team play, and networks will pay money to watch them on TV, etc. The program will (ideally) succeed because of that player. And the player gets exposure as a result. It's a business arrangement on both sides. Perhaps this USC kid should honor a commitment to his teammates - a decision that we, tapping away on our phones in random cities, have no real input on.
But commitment to the school has nothing to do with it.
A useful degree is available if you want it and are capable of attaining it. If you choose not to get it because you are going to play in the NBA, that is your business, but you should still honor your commitment to the school and the team. I don't really care if the school is making money. They are still preparing you for your career just like they do accountants and doctors. You should hold up your end of the bargain. I agree wholeheartedly that my opinion is irrelevant.
-
If I was a teammate, I would be pissed. Maybe that makes me selfish. I don't think so, but that's my opinion, not a statement of fact. The NIT may not mean much to the NBA draft pick but it could mean a whole hell of a lot to the team.
I understand it more for football because of the nature of the game. Risk of injury is much higher. I'd also understand a player like Greg or Sam who has been playing injured taking off to heal.
-
As MU82 pointed out earlier, the exact same things were said of Leonard Fournette and Christian McCaffery when they skipped out on bowl games. It didn't hurt them at all.
Two very different sports and process:
1. College Football players have to play three years so scouts have a longer time to evaluate. I know in the case of USC, they are all upper classman but that is also a knock in basketball. They know your potential.
2. Both of those stated players, previously played in high major bowls
3. The NBA draft is 2 rounds and the NFL draft is 7 rounds. There are only 60 picks so a lot of competition.
4. 2nd Round on NBA draft is not big time guaranteed money. As a scout, i would be asking should a take an upper classman who decided not to play or a one and done player with potential. Look at the number of NFL players who dropped significantly in the NFL draft because they smoked weed or had their twitter hacked. That is millions of dollars.
5. Chance of significant injury in basketball is way lower. As Fournette and McCaffery proved themselves, it transitioned to injury prevention. I don't see anyone on USC that has proved themselves.
6. You don't make impressive money in either Europe or D-League. Here is an article (a little dated) that shows your earning potential is limited.
http://sportsagentblog.com/2012/07/30/nba-d-league-vs-european-basketball-why-dont-more-players-go-to-europe/
Really this is about Chimezie and in most drafts he is currently a late first rounder. That doesn't account for all early entrants, those who make a big run and those from Europe. If he drops 1-6 spots he is in the second round and lost his big guaranteed money and the value drops greatly.
https://hypebeast.com/2017/6/nba-draft-contract-values-first-second-round-drop
-
Well, in a very real way, they are being selfish....?
Being selfish and protecting your interests can be a fine line.
-
Difficult situation, but time will reveal your Character. It's up to us to interrupt that. To me it comes down to are you a Teammate or Not.
-
Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !
What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT. Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Invite only teams from the lesser conferences that have very good records to the NIT.
There are enough teams with excellent records that play in the one bid conferences and some in the mid Majors that would relish the thought of playing in a post season tournament.
-
Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !
What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT. Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Invite only teams from the lesser conferences that have very good records to the NIT.
There are enough teams with excellent records that play in the one bid conferences and some in the mid Majors that would relish the thought of playing in a post season tournament
Don't like it. They have the CBI and CIT for that.
-
Being selfish and protecting your interests can be a fine line.
We all risk our lives every day. At times one has to live the life and enjoy things. Some folks lose sight of that.
-
Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !
What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT. Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Invite only teams from the lesser conferences that have very good records to the NIT.
There are enough teams with excellent records that play in the one bid conferences and some in the mid Majors that would relish the thought of playing in a post season tournament.
Not a bad idea, if you ask me. Seems to me the non-majors have the deck stacked against them when it comes to the NCAA, given the challenges scheduling and all.
ButI think in the end this idea would be doomed to failure because conferences would want to be designated as power conferences. Besides the power 5 football conferences, the Big East (obviously), the AAC and the Atlantic 10 would definitely have a problem being lumped into the non-power conferences. I think there would be several others that would balk at being identified officially as a non-power conference (the MAC, the WCC, maybe the Mountain West)
-
Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !
What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT. Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Invite only teams from the lesser conferences that have very good records to the NIT.
There are enough teams with excellent records that play in the one bid conferences and some in the mid Majors that would relish the thought of playing in a post season tournament.
Not a huge fan. I would prefer the 64 best teams in the NCAA regardless of conference affiliation and the next best 32 for the NIT.
If I were to change it I would put more importance on the Conference Tournament and say only the winner gets into the NCAA tournament. They then battle it out for who is the best team. Then have the runner-up or regular season champion play in the NIT. If you want to expand the tournament then you could have the top 4 teams from each conference play. Very similar model to European soccer.
I like that approach better because:
1. It breaks up the need for conference affiliation. Having a monster conference like the current ACC and Big Ten is actually a detriment to your chances of making the tournament
2. It removes the subjectivity of the selection process
3. The conference tournament has more importance overall.
-
Not a huge fan. I would prefer the 64 best teams in the NCAA regardless of conference affiliation and the next best 32 for the NIT.
If I were to change it I would put more importance on the Conference Tournament and say only the winner gets into the NCAA tournament. They then battle it out for who is the best team. Then have the runner-up or regular season champion play in the NIT. If you want to expand the tournament then you could have the top 4 teams from each conference play. Very similar model to European soccer.
I like that approach better because:
1. It breaks up the need for conference affiliation. Having a monster conference like the current ACC and Big Ten is actually a detriment to your chances of making the tournament
2. It removes the subjectivity of the selection process
3. The conference tournament has more importance overall.
How is this similar to the European soccer model? Right now, the top four European leagues get four guaranteed places in the Champions League group stages.
If anything, European soccer has become more like the NCAAs. Reason? Eyeballs.
-
We all risk our lives every day. At times one has to live the life and enjoy things. Some folks lose sight of that.
Yep. If the USC players are not playing to protect their interests, they should also refrain from crossing busy streets, going into dangerous neighborhoods and such.
-
Not a huge fan. I would prefer the 64 best teams in the NCAA regardless of conference affiliation and the next best 32 for the NIT.
If I were to change it I would put more importance on the Conference Tournament and say only the winner gets into the NCAA tournament. They then battle it out for who is the best team. Then have the runner-up or regular season champion play in the NIT. If you want to expand the tournament then you could have the top 4 teams from each conference play. Very similar model to European soccer.
I like that approach better because:
1. It breaks up the need for conference affiliation. Having a monster conference like the current ACC and Big Ten is actually a detriment to your chances of making the tournament
2. It removes the subjectivity of the selection process
3. The conference tournament has more importance overall.
So the regular season means literally nothing at this point?
-
Yep. If the USC players are not playing to protect their interests, they should also refrain from crossing busy streets, going into dangerous neighborhoods and such.
Exactly.
I'll reiterate: bailing on the NIT has nothing to do with protecting one's interests. This is some kid trying out his best impression of activism.... either that or he's just a whiny little baby who doesn't like not getting his way. If folks want to do their own impression of "gullible moron," just keep pushing the [squeaky voice]"he's looking out for his best interests"[/squeaky] garbage.
That being said, it's 100% his prerogative whether his sits or plays, and I have no problem with anyone's decision to sit out. But let's at least recognize the motivations for what they are, and not for what best suits your personal agenda.
-
I would either eliminate the conference tourney or not allow the results from the non championship games to be computed into who makes the tourney. It seems inconsistent. Some are weighted heavily (Alabama), while others are not (Providence).
Also. Selection criteria should be a little more transparent before the season starts.
-
Exactly.
I'll reiterate: bailing on the NIT has nothing to do with protecting one's interests.
Of course it does. There is nothing for a player to gain by playing in the NIT. And there is a chance for player injury to occur.
Making silly comparisons to crossing a street notwithstanding.
-
How is this similar to the European soccer model? Right now, the top four European leagues get four guaranteed places in the Champions League group stages.
If anything, European soccer has become more like the NCAAs. Reason? Eyeballs.
Eye balls sure, however the best teams are in the best leagues and btw Italy is getting screwed in the current makeup. Just sayin
-
Eye balls sure, however the best teams are in the best leagues and btw Italy is getting screwed in the current makeup. Just sayin
Starting next year, Italy, England, Spain and Germany are all getting four guaranteed spots in the group stages.
-
Of course it does. There is nothing for a player to gain by playing in the NIT. And there is a chance for player injury to occur.
Making silly comparisons to crossing a street notwithstanding.
So again, I'll ask this question: to the player, what does the NCAAT offer that the NIT doesn't?
-
So again, I'll ask this question: to the player, what does the NCAAT offer that the NIT doesn't?
A championship.
-
The Summer League is tied in the NBA, the NIT is not. Blow out your knee playing in the NIT and that just potentially cost you million of dollars, and maybe even your NBA career. Not worth it.
I'm not talking about Summer League, I'm talking about pickup games to stay in shape, play with other guys but not officially sanctioned. Should these guys walk on so many eggshells as not to potentially get hurt?
-
So the regular season means literally nothing at this point?
What does the regular season mean after losing in the first round of the NCAA tournament? Nothing. All you are doing is making the conference tourney the first few rounds of the NCAA tournament.
-
A championship.
This!! And don't call the NIT winner the champion. It is the loser's bracket winner.
-
I'm not talking about Summer League, I'm talking about pickup games to stay in shape, play with other guys but not officially sanctioned. Should these guys walk on so many eggshells as not to potentially get hurt?
Participation in such games is voluntary, so the analogy fails. If players believe they're unnecessarily risk injury by participating in those events, they're free to skip them.
Also, those players have guaranteed contracts, so if they get hurt, they're still getting paid. Not comparable to a player heading into the draft from college.
-
Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !
What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT. Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Invite only teams from the lesser conferences that have very good records to the NIT.
There are enough teams with excellent records that play in the one bid conferences and some in the mid Majors that would relish the thought of playing in a post season tournament.
Many believe the big boys will eventually break away and exclude the lower D1 from the "Big Boy tourney.
Football has the distinction between d1 levels. Possibly the NIT evolves into the lower D1 championship?
I was looking at basketball attendance figures for last season and over 100 schools draw less for the entire season than Kentucky does for a single game. UWM with a season total of less than 19,000, all the way down to South Carolina State with a yearly attendance total of 4406.
-
I'm not talking about Summer League, I'm talking about pickup games to stay in shape, play with other guys but not officially sanctioned. Should these guys walk on so many eggshells as not to potentially get hurt?
I wouldn't be playing a lot of pick up ball between now and the NBA draft if I were a player.
-
Of course it does. There is nothing for a player to gain by playing in the NIT. And there is a chance for player injury to occur.
Making silly comparisons to crossing a street notwithstanding.
I would not say nothing. A chance to extend college career means something to some people, not everyone. Playing with your teammates. Chance to win a championship. Maybe play in NYC for the first time.
There is always a chance for injury. Why even have practices? How many basketball injuries happen in practice vs games? I'm going to guess more in practice due to the frequency, but we only see game injuries because they are on tv.
-
How have so many replies been posted on this topic and i've not seen one blaming Enfield or Swann for this? This is Enfield's 5th year - he has all his own players, lack of a cohesive team atmosphere rests solely on the coach and AD. That is in addition to the shame they've personally brought to the University and, more importantly, its fans by not making the NCAA.
-
How is this similar to the European soccer model? Right now, the top four European leagues get four guaranteed places in the Champions League group stages.
If anything, European soccer has become more like the NCAAs. Reason? Eyeballs.
As I said, it they want to expand the total number of teams from just the conference winners then do what the European leagues do which is cap the AQs.
European soccer ranks the leagues based on results from previous years. They then allocate a cap to those leagues. The team that qualify are the top 4 of the best leagues which pushes the leagues with multiple entrants to 16 leagues. They don't wait until the start of the tournament to arbitrarily decide how many teams from each league get it.
If you win your league you are in. If you want to expand the NCAA do what Europe did and add caps to AQ and base the number on how the league performed. Also give an AQ to the winner of the NIT like they do with the ELC.
It won't happen because the Power Conferences will want as many teams as possible because it is all about the money.
-
Just an idea - Please don't shoot the messenger !
What if the Power 7 (?) conferences were not eligible for the NIT. Earn an NCAA bid or bust.
Once upon a time, it was like this in some conferences. Until about 1970, the SEC and ACC generally forbade their teams from playing in anything other than the NCAA, which was limited to conference champions.
The SEC changed around 1970, when LSU went to the NIT.
-
That being said, it's 100% his prerogative whether his sits or plays, and I have no problem with anyone's decision to sit out. But let's at least recognize the motivations for what they are, and not for what best suits your personal agenda.
This makes sense to me! Well done, Benny.
-
As I said, it they want to expand the total number of teams from just the conference winners then do what the European leagues do which is cap the AQs.
European soccer ranks the leagues based on results from previous years. They then allocate a cap to those leagues. The team that qualify are the top 4 of the best leagues which pushes the leagues with multiple entrants to 16 leagues. They don't wait until the start of the tournament to arbitrarily decide how many teams from each league get it.
If you win your league you are in. If you want to expand the NCAA do what Europe did and add caps to AQ and base the number on how the league performed. Also give an AQ to the winner of the NIT like they do with the ELC.
It won't happen because the Power Conferences will want as many teams as possible because it is all about the money.
Ah OK. I get you know. So something like this for 2018-19 based on this year's RPI:
Big 12 - 6
Big East - 6
ACC - 6
SEC - 6
Pac 12 - 5
Big 10 - 5
American - 4
Missouri Valley - 3
Mountain West - 2
A10 - 2
MAC - 2
21 other conferences - 1 (Southland, MEAC, SWAC and Atlantic Sun in play-in)
Not sure I agree with you because I see a lot of problems with this.
-
By the way, I don't really mind the debate about who should get in and who shouldn't. Really the "top five" schools left out all had plenty of opportunities to improve their resume - but didn't get it done.
-
A championship.
Really? How much does said championship pay? Is the NCAA going to a Stanley Cup this year where every player's name goes on the trophy? Will the Wikipedia page for the 2018 Tournament say "Champion - [Insert Players' Names]." Championships are great for the school, but what does it do for the player?
So on one hand you claim that sitting out the NIT is all about protecting one's own interests... then you go on to espouse that the benefit of the NCAA is the chance of a team accomplishment.
[For further reading on the subject, I suggest giving "Jenkins, Kris" a Google. Not only did he win a championship, but he made the most memorable game-winning shot in a championship game ever. Where's his $50M contract with Golden State? He's playing in some basketball league that most people have never heard of... fat lot of good his "championship" did him, eh?]
tl;dr - Championships are not individual accomplishments, and in the NCAA, you're not compensated for winning one. So again I'll ask, from a player's perspective, what does the NCAAT offer that the NIT doesn't?
-
Really? How much does said championship pay? Is the NCAA going to a Stanley Cup this year where every player's name goes on the trophy? Will the Wikipedia page for the 2018 Tournament say "Champion - [Insert Players' Names]." Championships are great for the school, but what does it do for the player?
So on one hand you claim that sitting out the NIT is all about protecting one's own interests... then you go on to espouse that the benefit of the NCAA is the chance of a team accomplishment.
[For further reading on the subject, I suggest giving "Jenkins, Kris" a Google. Not only did he win a championship, but he made the most memorable game-winning shot in a championship game ever. Where's his $50M contract with Golden State? He's playing in some basketball league that most people have never heard of... fat lot of good his "championship" did him, eh?]
tl;dr - Championships are not individual accomplishments, and in the NCAA, you're not compensated for winning one. So again I'll ask, from a player's perspective, what does the NCAAT offer that the NIT doesn't?
Bragging rights. Possibly job prospects.
A dude I know from HS went on to play at UNC-Wilmington. He is now an assistant at a D-II school. He lists on his bio that he played in the NCAA tournament. Instant respect from high-school recruits, etc.
Contrast that with "I played in the NCAA's second-tier tournament." Doesn't have the same ring to it.
-
Really? How much does said championship pay? Is the NCAA going to a Stanley Cup this year where every player's name goes on the trophy? Will the Wikipedia page for the 2018 Tournament say "Champion - [Insert Players' Names]." Championships are great for the school, but what does it do for the player?
So on one hand you claim that sitting out the NIT is all about protecting one's own interests... then you go on to espouse that the benefit of the NCAA is the chance of a team accomplishment.
[For further reading on the subject, I suggest giving "Jenkins, Kris" a Google. Not only did he win a championship, but he made the most memorable game-winning shot in a championship game ever. Where's his $50M contract with Golden State? He's playing in some basketball league that most people have never heard of... fat lot of good his "championship" did him, eh?]
tl;dr - Championships are not individual accomplishments, and in the NCAA, you're not compensated for winning one. So again I'll ask, from a player's perspective, what does the NCAAT offer that the NIT doesn't?
NBA visibility. Steph Curry is a prime example, his tournament run with Davidson absolutely opened eyes that very likely wouldn't have been opened in the NIT. Additionally, I'd guess satisfaction as playing in and/or winning an NCAA championship is way way way more satisfying then playing in an NIT for the also-rans. These guys are hypercompetititve you think they like playing in the losers bracket?
-
tl;dr - Championships are not individual accomplishments, and in the NCAA, you're not compensated for winning one. So again I'll ask, from a player's perspective, what does the NCAAT offer that the NIT doesn't?
NCAA championship rings are selling for as much as five figures on eBay, so there's that.
-
Well, that pretty much gets right to the heart of it. I'd go with desire over need to be entertained, though.
I see, we don't like it when the cheap labor decides to protect their long term revenue prospects contrary to our need to be entertained.
(https://78.media.tumblr.com/0ded738204c302e0bc72e105823e2adc/tumblr_o5gra39OqF1tq4of6o1_400.gif)
-
Really? How much does said championship pay? Is the NCAA going to a Stanley Cup this year where every player's name goes on the trophy? Will the Wikipedia page for the 2018 Tournament say "Champion - [Insert Players' Names]." Championships are great for the school, but what does it do for the player?
So on one hand you claim that sitting out the NIT is all about protecting one's own interests... then you go on to espouse that the benefit of the NCAA is the chance of a team accomplishment.
[For further reading on the subject, I suggest giving "Jenkins, Kris" a Google. Not only did he win a championship, but he made the most memorable game-winning shot in a championship game ever. Where's his $50M contract with Golden State? He's playing in some basketball league that most people have never heard of... fat lot of good his "championship" did him, eh?]
tl;dr - Championships are not individual accomplishments, and in the NCAA, you're not compensated for winning one. So again I'll ask, from a player's perspective, what does the NCAAT offer that the NIT doesn't?
How do you think Kris Jenkins felt after making that shot?
What does the NCAAT offer that the NIT does not? A chance to compete for a championship at the highest level. I'm not saying that every player has to value that, but I'm certain that Kris Jenkins has no regrets that he played in the NCAA that he won with his Villanova teammates.
-
I wouldn't be playing a lot of pick up ball between now and the NBA draft if I were a player.
Are we going to get to a point where a player tells a coach this RPI 320 team isn't worth the risk, but I'll play in the conference games and key matchups?
-
Are we going to get to a point where a player tells a coach this RPI 320 team isn't worth the risk, but I'll play in the conference games and key matchups?
Yep. It will happen 100 times a week. Maybe more.
-
The point is you are a teammate, and your team is still playing and trying to win a championship. To walk away from your team--even if for explicable reasons--is selfish and a disservice to your team and teammates.
I agree 100% with this.
I know if I were the coach and a player chose to sit out, he would not be allowed to sit on the bench. My attitude would be that you chose to be no longer on the team.
-
The point is you are a teammate, and your team is still playing and trying to win a championship. To walk away from your team--even if for explicable reasons--is selfish and a disservice to your team and teammates.
I assume that also applies to transfers? What about coaching changes?
Aren't those 2 moves selfish and a disservice to the team - even if for explicable reasons?
-
I assume that also applies to transfers? What about coaching changes?
Aren't those 2 moves selfish and a disservice to the team - even if for explicable reasons?
Quite a few Scoopers side every single time with the overdog. It's OK for coaches to totally screw over their players but not OK for players to look out for their own self-interests.
-
I assume that also applies to transfers? What about coaching changes?
Aren't those 2 moves selfish and a disservice to the team - even if for explicable reasons?
Yes, it does apply to transfers, especially mid-season transfers. I absolutely see them as quitting on their team. Transferring at the end of a season is acceptable.
Same, but to a lesser degree, for coaches who leave. Bo Ryan quit on his team.
-
PAC 12 players choosing not to play in the round of 32 in the NCAA.
-
PAC 12 players choosing not to play in the round of 32 in the NCAA.
haha. +1
-
PAC 12 players choosing not to play in the round of 32 in the NCAA.
That's brilliant ;D
-
PAC 12 players choosing not to play in the round of 32 in the NCAA.
Well done Tower. I was going to say Arizona vacated their win to save the NCAA the trouble.
-
Maybe USC shouldn't be complaining about the NIT. The PAC12 became the first major conference not to get a team into the second round.
-
Maybe USC shouldn't be complaining about the NIT. The PAC12 became the first major conference not to get a team into the second round.
Fire all PAC 12 coaches!
-
Fire all PAC 12 coaches!
Jail them first.
-
Maybe they should skip NCAA tourney as well
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22797069/2018-ncaa-tournament-isaac-haas-purdue-boilermakers-broken-elbow
-
Maybe they should skip NCAA tourney as well
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22797069/2018-ncaa-tournament-isaac-haas-purdue-boilermakers-broken-elbow
If they can clear the brace he is wearing he is playing.
-
Arrest them!
-
Just curious. For the people who are OK with players who skip NIT games...what would you say if their team advanced to NYC and suddenly they wanted to play under the brighter lights?
-
Just curious. For the people who are OK with players who skip NIT games...what would you say if their team advanced to NYC and suddenly they wanted to play under the brighter lights?
No. Once they leave they leave.
-
No. Once they leave they leave.
..but once they leave they shouldn't have their financial aid canceled?
-
..but once they leave they shouldn't have their financial aid canceled?
No.
-
No.
False! They should. They sign an agreement to participate in a sport in exchange for financial aid. #NoParticipateNoAid.
-
False! They should. They sign an agreement to participate in a sport in exchange for financial aid. #NoParticipateNoAid.
Then tax them. Lord knows, the federal and state governments could use the money!
-
..but once they leave they shouldn't have their financial aid canceled?
Sure. Wouldn't bother me. They're gonna be rich anyway.
Schools won't do it, though, so this is a strawman.
-
PAC 12 players choosing not to play in the round of 32 in the NCAA.
To be expected after they also chose not to play in the round of 64.